Heavy friend wants a bike--help?

I would just think at 250, you'd be consigned to level trails
basically. ;-(

Goodness NO!

I did Ride the Rockies at 210 lbs - 7 days of Colorado Mtn Passes (and I was 59
years old and had only ridden for 3 monhts).

I had some medical problems last year and got out of shape and up to 245. But
still, I was able to climb steep hills - even now approaching 64yo. Takes a
bit longer I am back down to 220, and can go like H*LL again, keeping up and
even passing the younger folks. (I am pretty muscular - lifting weights for
many years - and my body fat is pretty decent).

I have to realize that there is no way a 220 lb'er can get up hills like
someone weighing 150, but I can get up them.

Don't limit yourself, please.

You can do a lot, have fun, and lose weight all in the same day!!

Please enjoy. It is a GREAT activity.


http://members.aol.com/foxcondorsrvtns
(Colorado rental condo)

http://members.aol.com/dnvrfox
(Family Web Page)

In article ,
Denver C. Fox wrote:
I would just think at 250, you'd be consigned to level trails
basically. ;-(

Goodness NO!

I did Ride the Rockies at 210 lbs - 7 days of Colorado Mtn Passes (and I was 59
years old and had only ridden for 3 monhts).

I had some medical problems last year and got out of shape and up to 245. But
still, I was able to climb steep hills - even now approaching 64yo. Takes a
bit longer I am back down to 220, and can go like H*LL again, keeping up and
even passing the younger folks. (I am pretty muscular - lifting weights for
many years - and my body fat is pretty decent).

I have to realize that there is no way a 220 lb'er can get up hills like
someone weighing 150, but I can get up them.

Don't limit yourself, please.

You can do a lot, have fun, and lose weight all in the same day!!

Please enjoy. It is a GREAT activity.


http://members.aol.com/foxcondorsrvtns
(Colorado rental condo)

http://members.aol.com/dnvrfox
(Family Web Page)


Hey Denver, that's great. I have a background in triathlons
(short course back of the pack-er) and ran 10 milers and lots
of 10K fun runs in my youth, but at 50, I'm worried that unless
I'm at 200ish, I'll be unable to climb even small hills.

I've been afraid to go out on the streets and find myself
having to take a cab home. But I'm kidding a little.

Glad to hear you've done so well. I'm already thinking about
some biking on various canal trails and stuff near here.

The one thing that did put me off was the trail bike course
that my wife and I went to south of C'ville. We got there and
it was so steep and rocky, and narrow, I feared serious injury.
My wife was pretty athletic, and she took about 2 min and
walked the bike back to the car. Maybe that was a bad course,
although it highly suggested.

I'll keep trying!

-B

--
Email Replies to johnsonnospm01j att ntelos dott net

In article ,
David L. Johnson wrote:
On Wed, 08 Oct 2003 04:48:39 +0000, Badger South wrote:


I'm planning to lose down to at least 200 so I can continue, and maybe
even lower than that.

Yeah, I'm planning to weigh 160 real soon now....

Are you being sarcastic? I'm serious. I'm sure I can lose 50lbs quite
easily if I get in the 'zone'. I'm down 15lbs since August.

low enough gear get up anything.

Cool. I'm getting psyched. As I said to Denver, I had a couple
bad experiences. I tried to ride across town with like a week
of training after not riding for years and had to walk it up a
couple hills. Also we went to an area with a highly touted bike
trail and were shocked at how, uh 'technical' it looked.

I'm not at the point where I can tail hop over a log, or
boulder, and this trail had that everywhere, it looked.

But appreciate the pos reinforcement. I'll be at 200 by next
spring, no problemo.

I just long-distance (IM) coached my brother (diet) from 183 to
151, and we started in March. ;-)

-B
--
Email Replies to johnsonnospm01j att ntelos dott net

On Wed, 8 Oct 2003 19:31:10 -0400, David Kerber
wrote:
In article ,
says...
What I want to know is there any hope of a heavier rider to
ride significant hills and steep, real, mountain bike courses
trails? I could ride like a maniac when I was 155 in college.
But since I bulked up and did body building, I was like
struggling on moderately hill courses at 185-190.

That will come with conditioning of your leg muscles and/or lower gears.

I would just think at 250, you'd be consigned to level trails
basically. ;-(

Not if you get a nice low granny gear.

I am 210 pounds.

Given low gears, and later on, conditioned muscles, I've
been able to conquer moderate hills off and on road; and
in fact, with a granny gear, if I'm patient enough, I can go
up long, steep paved hills. Off-road, however, there are
many hills where I ride that I must walk.

There are additional issues to consider; with all that weight,
and the muscles that are used to move said weight, and
ultra-low gears, it gets rather difficult to find a compromise
between balance and traction while climbing steep hills off
road. Additionally, moving that weight up longer, shallower
hills requires much patience, which is often lacking,
especially if the gear feels easy to turn -- it encourages you
to spin faster, which quickly wears out the legs and lungs,
or occasionally leads to upshifting, which drains you quite
immediately.

On-road, it's easier, with the right gears and patience.
The equipment weight savings does matter a little, but
more importantly, the terrain and bike absorb less of your
pedalling energy, so you can use a little higher gear. At
slow speeds, rough terrain sucks away most of your
inertia and pedalling energy.

Just wondering what other ppl experience. I'm sure if you've
been riding at 245 for 10 years it doesn't matter. Certainly
you wouldn't go to the Tour, or Rockies, or even the
Appalacians, right?

With training and the right gears, you should be able to ride pretty
much anywhere unless your legs are about the size of pencils.

That would take a whole lot of training; although I suspect
that's no different for lighter people.
--
Rick "Moderately heavy, no patience, insufficient muscle" Onanian

On Thu, 9 Oct 2003 03:53:59 +0000 (UTC),
(Badger South) wrote:
I'm not at the point where I can tail hop over a log, or
boulder, and this trail had that everywhere, it looked.

You know, my theory on technical bike handling for
heavier riders is that we should be able to do that
sort of stuff well -- if we can get our own fat asses
over that stuff, then it should be trivial to bring the
weight of the bike along.

-B
--
Rick "Theory != Practice, unfortunately" Onanian

On Thu, 09 Oct 2003 03:53:59 +0000, Badger South wrote:

I'm planning to lose down to at least 200 so I can continue, and maybe
even lower than that.

Yeah, I'm planning to weigh 160 real soon now....

Are you being sarcastic? I'm serious. I'm sure I can lose 50lbs quite
easily if I get in the 'zone'. I'm down 15lbs since August.

When I got back on the bike I quickly dropped about 15 lbs. But in
several years I haven't lost any more. Maybe I should starve myself, but
I don't really want to do that.

I didn't mean to be all that sarcastic. But losing a lot of weight is not
easy.


low enough gear get up anything.

Cool. I'm getting psyched. As I said to Denver, I had a couple bad
experiences. I tried to ride across town with like a week of training
after not riding for years and had to walk it up a couple hills.

A week of training is not enough. I*had trouble climbing hills -- beyond
what I have now, and way beyond what I*remembered from my youth, for the
first year. I walked a lot of hills that year. Now I don't.

--

David L. Johnson

__o | A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored
_`\(,_ | by little statesmen and philosophers and divines. --Ralph Waldo
(_)/ (_) | Emerson

In article ,
Rick Onanian wrote:
On Thu, 9 Oct 2003 03:53:59 +0000 (UTC),
(Badger South) wrote:
I'm not at the point where I can tail hop over a log, or
boulder, and this trail had that everywhere, it looked.

You know, my theory on technical bike handling for
heavier riders is that we should be able to do that
sort of stuff well -- if we can get our own fat asses
over that stuff, then it should be trivial to bring the
weight of the bike along.

-B
--
Rick "Theory != Practice, unfortunately" Onanian

Heck, last year, with a bit additional lb-age, I was jumping
for the frisbee with my bro on the beach, and he holds up his
thumb and index finger about 1 cm. space.

I'm like what, you want a shot glass refill?

Naw, he chuckles, your vertical leap.

Doh!

-B

--
Email Replies to johnsonnospm01j att ntelos dott net

In article ,
David L. Johnson wrote:
On Thu, 09 Oct 2003 03:53:59 +0000, Badger South wrote:

I'm planning to lose down to at least 200 so I can continue, and maybe
even lower than that.

Yeah, I'm planning to weigh 160 real soon now....

Are you being sarcastic? I'm serious. I'm sure I can lose 50lbs quite
easily if I get in the 'zone'. I'm down 15lbs since August.

When I got back on the bike I quickly dropped about 15 lbs. But in
several years I haven't lost any more. Maybe I should starve myself, but
I don't really want to do that.

I didn't mean to be all that sarcastic. But losing a lot of weight is not
easy.

Yeah, this is true. I discovered I was Insulin resistant, and
had an allergy/craving for starch.

I gained all my weight the way many computer geeks do. I
started a project for the department in 1993 and spent the next
1.5 years hammering away on my computer after hours until the
wee hours every night.

It was about when the OJ trial started, b/c I had a little 13"
tv installed (I had a spare room in the basement, all geeked
out). ;-)

I put on like 60lbs quickly, going from an active life to
virtual sedentaryness. Normally when I get moving, my weight
will move.

Did it in 1998, but got another project, and had an injury in
early 2001.

Now I'm retired, and can get in one or two workouts per day.

Thanks for the encourage.

-B
--
Email Replies to johnsonnospm01j att ntelos dott net

Depending on what kind of riding your friend does, he might want to look at a
Trek 520 Touring bike. It has a steel frame, heavy duty rims and is built to
carry a lot of weight.

I have one and love it. I'm in the 240 pound range and use the bike mostly for
urban commuting, which often involves hauling a lot of heavy groceries.

He should be able to get a new one for under $1,000.

I don't think the weight will matter that much. Bikes these days are made to withstand a lot so just because he is slightly bigger than you are he wont need extra special strength in his bike.

I would recommend a trip to your local bike shop. They will have the expertise to fit you with the best bike for your size and frame and then be able to adjust it to fit your height etc.

I wouldn't worry about your size. There is definitely something suitable for you.